←back to thread

The C23 edition of Modern C

(gustedt.wordpress.com)
415 points bwidlar | 4 comments | 15 Oct 24 16:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
belter ◴[15 Oct 24 17:30 UTC] No.41850897[source]▶
Important reminder just in the Preface :-)

Takeaway #1: "C and C++ are different: don’t mix them, and don’t mix them up"

replies(7): >>41850960 #>>41851047 #>>41851166 #>>41851693 #>>41853183 #>>41855660 #>>41857019 #
pjmlp ◴[15 Oct 24 17:35 UTC] No.41850960[source]▶
Specially relevant to all those folks that insist on "Coding C with a C++ compiler", instead of safer language constructs, and standard library alternatives provided by C++ during the last decades.
replies(3): >>41851031 #>>41851082 #>>41851268 #
flohofwoe ◴[15 Oct 24 18:04 UTC] No.41851268[source]▶
Funny because for a long time the Microsoft MSVC team explicitly recommended compiling C code with a C++ compiler because they couldn't be arsed to update their C frontend for over two decades (which thankfully has changed now) ;)

https://herbsutter.com/2012/05/03/reader-qa-what-about-vc-an...

replies(2): >>41851659 #>>41852439 #
rdtsc ◴[15 Oct 24 18:35 UTC] No.41851659[source]▶
That thing always baffled me, this huge company building a professional IDE couldn't figure out how to ship updates to the C compiler.

> it is hard to say no to you, and I’m sorry to say it. But we have to choose a focus, and our focus is to implement (the standard) and innovate (with extensions like everyone but which we also contribute for potential standardization) in C++.

I mean, yeah if it came from a two member team at a startup, sure focus on C++, understandably. But Microsoft, what happened to "Developers! Developers! Developers!"?

replies(3): >>41851811 #>>41851984 #>>41852459 #
pjmlp ◴[15 Oct 24 19:54 UTC] No.41852459[source]▶
It was on purpose, Microsoft was done with C, the official message was to move on to C++.

The change of heart was the new management, and the whole Microsoft <3 FOSS.

replies(1): >>41852886 #
rdtsc ◴[15 Oct 24 20:42 UTC] No.41852886[source]▶
> It was on purpose, Microsoft was done with C

Indeed, and yet here we are with C23

> The change of heart was the new management, and the whole Microsoft <3 FOSS.

Yeah, agree. To me the turning point was when they created WSL.

replies(2): >>41855699 #>>41856495 #
1. kragen ◴[16 Oct 24 04:46 UTC] No.41855699[source]▶
Microsoft didn't create C23 and they don't <3 FOSS. They're accepting that they have to deal with FOSS, but installing Windows will still make your Linux system unbootable until you fix it with a rescue disk, among numerous other unfriendly things they do.
replies(2): >>41855935 #>>41857343 #
2. alexvitkov ◴[16 Oct 24 05:36 UTC] No.41855935[source]▶
I haven't seen Windows fuck up the EFI partition or delete the other entries in a while now. After installing it the machine will usually boot directly into it, but it should be just a toggle in the firmware to switch back to GRUB.
replies(1): >>41856064 #
3. kragen ◴[16 Oct 24 06:07 UTC] No.41856064[source]▶
That's an improvement! When did they fix that?
4. chithanh ◴[16 Oct 24 10:02 UTC] No.41857343[source]▶
> installing Windows will still make your Linux system unbootable until you fix it with a rescue disk

This is no longer true. On UEFI systems the only thing you have to do normally is fix the boot order. In fact installing Linux first and Windows second tends to be the better dual-boot strategy nowadays.

Fixing the boot order can be done from UEFI setup, and even from Windows command line

  bcdedit /enum firmware
  bcdedit /set {fwbootmgr} displayorder {yourlinuxuuid} /addfirst
(Put single quotes around {} if you use PowerShell instead of CMD.exe)